AND, it's the designers game, they can decide how they want their audience to play...if the audience doesn't like it, they find some other game they like...the designers owe you nothing.

This is true it's their game but it's the customer who has to like it and buy it. Many a developer has disappeared (in fact the one that started this particular series Koios) because their games didn't appeal to the customer. So, it's in their own interest (as you can see from the new developers of this game who ARE INTERESTED in our feedback) to pay attention to their customers and at least attempt to appease them as much as possible.

And with that ^ being said. This is a WISH LIST thread and I WISH for more OPTIONS as I listed them. So let's keep it on topic please and put down wishes not complain about others wishes.

Let me say this here, we are interested in ALL of your feedback. We may well not implement it but we do want to hear what you guys would like to see done.

Then it comes down to time and resources once again. In a few weeks the clock will start ticking again. When it does there will be lots of ideas discussed. Let's have anything and everything you would like to see be on that discussion list.

Keep in mind the focus of the game being a platoon level game first and foremost. But also keep in mind that we've blurred that line in a couple of places already and we could blur it again in the future for the right combination of gameplay, historical accuracy and FUN.

1. HQ gets a HQ ONLY command button that branches off just like the others so it can be given orders without effecting its subordinates as it does now.

2. Lower supression levels a little bit for infantry. It feels as if they goto ground a bit too easily in the face of danger.

3. Add a no rout, hold at all costs feature like a last stand, what if those units at Bastonge had the rout factors of the units in this game? Besides realistically Hitler said no retreating.Aggressive SOP Elite units are very resistant to routing

5. Create a step feature for grass animations like trees. 3 steps would be fine instead of just on/off

6. Of course I want a female partisan and a female sharpshooter.

7. If possible perhaps a 30:0 per turn feature. I like 40:0 but more variety is always better.

8. Recheck that FPS meter we get by pressing F1 somehow now I just don't think it's working correctly. I got some 10-fps last night and had LOWERED the settings from Ultra to High, my card is better than that and I have a quad core cpu i7 3.2ghz Strange thing is the video is still pretty smooth and it should be choppy at 10fps the only difference I see is the objective flags flapping is different.

The F1 FPS measurement is accurate.

9. When setting up random battles give us an ability to choose "random" map at the "template" choice point. I was surprised this wasn't already implemented and I had to pick a map to play on.

Already done and in the Ostfront release.

10. When choosing what type of army group also put a "random" pick in that box as well instead of having to pick infantry, tank battallion, etc. etc. I'd like the computer to randomly pick what i get to play with sometimes as well. Even a custom choice and then put a ? on each type of unit in the mixed of combatants like infantry, trucks, armor, artillery etc. etc. to get a more random group of units to play with. I like NOT KNOWING what I'm going to get to command in a battle the most.

Already done and in the Ostfront release.

11. To add damage effects to the 3d models? Like scratches from non-penetrating hits, holes from shots that do penetrate, track damage, etc? I would love to see that.

12. A unit pause command.

13. Text feedback when a unit starts firing at something, specifically: what it's firing at and with what. Sort of the same information that's displayed in the lower left corner of the UI when you select a unit.

14. Unlimited Ammo feature.

15. Unlimited waypoints

16. Moveable waypoints

17. Clicking on an enemy unit will hilight the human players units that are in its LOS.

18. The ability to transport AT/Infantry guns.

19. The ability to have some influence on airstrikes.

20. A command system that is bit more straight forward when one wants give individual orders.

21. Destructible buildings.

22. A map editor that is much more intuitive. Realistically this probably will not happen but it would be nice.

This post will get lost soon but let me say that the game has a design philosophy behind it to play at the platoon command level. Not just orders but the ammo and waypoints were debated. We want to give options to the player but crossing some line will make it no longer PC.

Which is great if the platoon orders work well.

However, every time I issue a platoon move order, one or more subordinates ends up with a silly movement path that sends him into danger.

So, we either need a simple orders system that allows us to micro-manage those errant sub units, or the platoon orders system needs to be optimized :)

The orders system is simple enough now to give any subordinate a secondary order within seconds. You're just not used to the system yet. That's why this thread is too soon. You guys are all giving knee jerk reactions to what you see without having any experience at using it. It's like saying a bow and arrow are easier to use than a rifle so they must be more efficient. A rifle takes more training to use correctly and maintain. That doesn't make it less efficient. It just makes it different.

And please add the possibility for bigger maps and more units. Most people won't be able to use it or don't want to use it perhaps, but it would be good to have the option nevertheless. I love manoeuvring around on huge maps and flanking the enemy.

That's why this thread is too soon. You guys are all giving knee jerk reactions to what you see without having any experience at using it.

Having a feeling that there's a lack of feedback to the user in the game doesn't have much to do with experience or the lack thereof, it's either there or it isn't. Currently, the feedback I feel is missing isn't displayed in a convenient, easy to read way. I agree though that comments on the game itself are probably premature.

I do have to say after 3 battles that the tac AI has indeed made some curious choices, so I also agree with wish 23. Ideally, tanks shouldn't start firing at a Rifle squad 300 meters away if they're being engaged by an AT gun that they can see and thus hit, but currently the Rifle squad, which can only dream of harming a tank at that distance, can take priority.

That's why this thread is too soon. You guys are all giving knee jerk reactions to what you see without having any experience at using it.

Having a feeling that there's a lack of feedback to the user in the game doesn't have much to do with experience or the lack thereof, it's either there or it isn't. Currently, the feedback I feel is missing isn't displayed in a convenient, easy to read way. I agree though that comments on the game itself are probably premature.

I do have to say after 3 battles that the tac AI has indeed made some curious choices, so I also agree with wish 23. Ideally, tanks shouldn't start firing at a Rifle squad 300 meters away if they're being engaged by an AT gun that they can see and thus hit, but currently the Rifle squad, which can only dream of harming a tank at that distance, can take priority.

In general the TacAI selects targets based on a. How likely the given unit can destroy the enemy and b. How likely the enemy unit can destory me. This is a complex weighted function which takes into acount a whole bunch of variables including los, ammo type, ammo left, damage potential, unit experience, etc. It may be that some of the function weightings need to be reviewed.

I might add that in reality target fixation was a very real issue. Even humans don't always pick the "mathematically" best target. If the AI got it right every time it may seem a bit robotic.

While I haven't had much play time in this yet I don't think the Unlimited Ammo feature would be a good idea unless it's a selectable option. Depending on the year and scenario the Germans were running short on ammo ( and just about verything else).

I would like a different color for the message when reinforcements arrive. They currently show up in white and doesen't get your attention. Maybe something like a really bright red.

Perhaps, in time, we can also have AA, in the form of Flakvierling on vehicles and stuff. They did play quite a big role in infantry support. Not to mention how nice the explosions of 20 mm grenades amidst enemy infantry is portrayed in this game. [:D] Can't get enough of it. They simply disappear in the dust and smoke.

I had read somewhere that the team had considered reverse field of view so you could click on an enemy and see lines indicating which of your units could see him. That would be much better than cycling through your units.

I'd like to add +1 to even more verbose messaging.

As a personal preference it would be handy to be able to add 'codenames' or other designations to units so that during battle if I see "*west flank group* Panzer III destroyed" I would know exactly where to look. Not a big deal, just would be interesting.

I would like the option to leave questionmarks longer, or the ability to put a marker on the map so that if I see something I can put "Suspected KV-1" or the like. It wouldn't be good enough for area fire with a tank but it would keep my small brain from forgetting what I saw.

I'm new to the series, but what is the opinion on air recon? If we could designate an area and have a Storch fly over and give us some idea, it would be great. An exposed tank could be identified, and questionmarks for everything else. You could make it a chance based flyover so you could simulate the recon plane having been shot down. And futher you could make the information only visible to units within radio contact.

I would like to see additional Russian campaigns. And...maybe North Africa as a expansion pack? :)

A final personal preference would be for more sound. What we have is good, but background battle sounds (simulating the wider conflict outside of our control), background environment, and additional sounds from soldiers in combat would be great.

I'm enjoying the game greatly, and I'm glad to support your dedicated work.

Another point regarding making Random Campaigns. I've noticed that for instance for the 1. Pz.D. it is impossible to start at a date later than August 1943. Wouldn't it be possible to chose the period by myself? I'm mainly interested in 1944-battles and would love to start in that year with my campaign. I also would like to pick my own units (I know, nothing random about that anymore) or at least replace useless units such as trucks or SPW.

Another observation. My PSW 222 encountered a T70, so I gave it the order to withdraw. I also gave it orders to keep on firing at the T70, if only to keep the head of the commander down and limit it's ability to hit me. My PSW began to fire allright, but forgot to withdraw and was destroyed. Shouldn't I have given those two orders at the same time or was it just bad luck?

1. HQ gets a HQ ONLY command button that branches off just like the others so it can be given orders without effecting its subordinates as it does now.

2. Lower supression levels a little bit for infantry. It feels as if they goto ground a bit too easily in the face of danger.

3. Add a no rout, hold at all costs feature like a last stand, what if those units at Bastonge had the rout factors of the units in this game? Besides realistically Hitler said no retreating. Aggressive SOP Elite units are very resistant to routing Others are not so resistant and would benefit from a Hold At All Costs order.

4. Create a step feature for grass animations like trees. 3 steps would be fine instead of just on/off

5. Of course I want a female partisan and a female sharpshooter.

6. If possible perhaps a 30:0 per turn feature. I like 40:0 but more variety is always better.

7. Recheck that FPS meter we get by pressing F1 somehow now I just don't think it's working correctly. I got some 10-fps last night and had LOWERED the settings from Ultra to High, my card is better than that and I have a quad core cpu i7 3.2ghz Strange thing is the video is still pretty smooth and it should be choppy at 10fps the only difference I see is the objective flags flapping is different.

The F1 FPS measurement is accurate.

8. When setting up random battles give us an ability to choose "random" map at the "template" choice point. I was surprised this wasn't already implemented and I had to pick a map to play on.

Already done and in the Ostfront release.

9. When choosing what type of army group also put a "random" pick in that box as well instead of having to pick infantry, tank battallion, etc. etc. I'd like the computer to randomly pick what i get to play with sometimes as well. Even a custom choice and then put a ? on each type of unit in the mixed of combatants like infantry, trucks, armor, artillery etc. etc. to get a more random group of units to play with. I like NOT KNOWING what I'm going to get to command in a battle the most.

Already done and in the Ostfront release.

10. To add damage effects to the 3d models? Like scratches from non-penetrating hits, holes from shots that do penetrate, track damage, etc? I would love to see that.

11. A unit pause command.

12. Text feedback when a unit starts firing at something, specifically: what it's firing at and with what. Sort of the same information that's displayed in the lower left corner of the UI when you select a unit.

13. Unlimited Ammo feature.

14. Unlimited waypoints

15. Moveable waypoints

16. Clicking on an enemy unit will hilight the human players units that are in its LOS.

17. The ability to transport AT/Infantry guns.

18. The ability to have some influence on airstrikes.

19. A command system that is bit more straight forward when one wants give individual orders.

20. Destructible buildings.

21. A map editor that is much more intuitive. Realistically this probably will not happen but it would be nice.

23. Better display of maps to be chosen for Random battles and campaigns.

24. Larger Maps.

25. More units.

26. Unit order ques.

27. A different color for the message when reinforcements arrive.

28. AA guns.

29. Reverse field of view so you could click on an enemy and see lines indicating which of your units could see him. That would be much better than cycling through your units.

30. More verbose messaging.

33. Add 'codenames' or other designations to units so that during battle if I see "*west flank group* Panzer III destroyed" I would know exactly where to look.

34. Leave questionmarks longer, or the ability to put a marker on the map so that if I see something I can put "Suspected KV-1" or the like. It wouldn't be good enough for area fire with a tank but it would keep my small brain from forgetting what I saw.

35. Optional air recon. If we could designate an area and have a Storch fly over and give us some idea, it would be great. An exposed tank could be identified, and question marks for everything else. You could make it a chance based flyover so you could simulate the recon plane having been shot down. And futher you could make the information only visible to units within radio contact.

Another point regarding making Random Campaigns. I've noticed that for instance for the 1. Pz.D. it is impossible to start at a date later than August 1943. Wouldn't it be possible to chose the period by myself? I'm mainly interested in 1944-battles and would love to start in that year with my campaign. I also would like to pick my own units (I know, nothing random about that anymore) or at least replace useless units such as trucks or SPW.

I'm not sure if you're interested in that kind of thinking, but you can also create your own random campaigns. Creating one similar to the 1st Pz Div but only covering 1944 should be doable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jacko

Another observation. My PSW 222 encountered a T70, so I gave it the order to withdraw. I also gave it orders to keep on firing at the T70, if only to keep the head of the commander down and limit it's ability to hit me. My PSW began to fire allright, but forgot to withdraw and was destroyed. Shouldn't I have given those two orders at the same time or was it just bad luck?

Yep - your target order over rode your withdraw order. If you issue a withdraw order while you are in good condition, the withdrawing unit can still select targets on it's own and fire.

Maybe I've missed it but where is the "dig-in" command and graphic entrenchments? I don't think everything "hold or entrench" wise should be relegated to "Aggressive SOP + Elite units", every unit that was given a HOLD at all costs command wasn't an ELITE unit historically.

Entrenchments and foxholes are map/scenario features rather than orders as digging them is outside the time scale of these scenarios. The Aggressive SOP and good cover will help even Green squads (though you still can't expect much from them).

Argghh so many things have to be PLAYER MADE which I hate. CMx1 you didn't buy dig in trenches either. You had a command during setup/placement to digin (D) and a trench was created a small round circle that the 3 units sat in after placement/setup phase.

ORIGINAL: diablo1 Argghh so many things have to be PLAYER MADE which I hate. CMx1 you didn't buy dig in trenches either. You had a command during setup/placement to digin (D) and a trench was created a small round circle that the 3 units sat in after placement/setup phase.

Yep, I remember that. Something like that is also possible for the future, but having it as an order outside of setup would not be realistic.